Cargando…

Learning needs analysis to guide teaching evidence-based medicine: knowledge and beliefs amongst trainees from various specialities

BACKGROUND: We undertook a needs assessment exercise using questionnaire survey of junior doctors' knowledge and beliefs concerning evidence-based medicine (EBM) and critical literature appraisal, as this is a core competence in postgraduate medical education. METHODS: We surveyed 317 junior do...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hadley, Julie A, Wall, David, Khan, Khalid S
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1885246/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17493274
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-7-11
_version_ 1782133610358243328
author Hadley, Julie A
Wall, David
Khan, Khalid S
author_facet Hadley, Julie A
Wall, David
Khan, Khalid S
author_sort Hadley, Julie A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: We undertook a needs assessment exercise using questionnaire survey of junior doctors' knowledge and beliefs concerning evidence-based medicine (EBM) and critical literature appraisal, as this is a core competence in postgraduate medical education. METHODS: We surveyed 317 junior doctors in various specialities in the UK West Midlands Deanery. Using validated questionnaires we compared the needs of different trainee groups. Results overall were internally consistent (Cronbach's alpha 0.929). RESULTS: Respondents' generally felt that they had poor training in EBM (Mean score 2.2, possible range 1 – 6) and that they needed more education (Mean score 5.3, possible range 1–6). Male trainees felt more confident at evaluating statistical tests than females (p = 0.002). Female trainees considered patient choice above the evidence more often than males (p = 0.038). Trainees from surgical speciality felt more confident at assessing research evidence (p = 0.009) whereas those from medical speciality felt more confident at evaluating statistical tests (p = 0.038) than other specialities. However, non-surgical specialities tended to believe that EBM had little impact on practice (p = 0.029). Respondents who had been qualified for 11 years or over felt overall more confident in their knowledge relating to EBM than those who had been qualified less than 10 years. In particular, they felt more confident at being able to assess study designs (p = < 0.001) and the general worth of research papers (p = < 0.001). Trainees with prior research experience were less likely to find original work confusing (p = 0.003) and felt more confident that they can assess research evidence (p = < 0.001) compared to those without previous research experience. Trainees without previous research experience felt that clinical judgement was more important than evidence (p = < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There is a perceived deficit in postgraduate doctors' EBM knowledge and critical appraisal skills. Learning needs vary according to gender, place of basic medical qualification, time since graduation, prior research experience and speciality. EBM training curricular development should take into account the findings of our needs assessment study.
format Text
id pubmed-1885246
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-18852462007-05-31 Learning needs analysis to guide teaching evidence-based medicine: knowledge and beliefs amongst trainees from various specialities Hadley, Julie A Wall, David Khan, Khalid S BMC Med Educ Research Article BACKGROUND: We undertook a needs assessment exercise using questionnaire survey of junior doctors' knowledge and beliefs concerning evidence-based medicine (EBM) and critical literature appraisal, as this is a core competence in postgraduate medical education. METHODS: We surveyed 317 junior doctors in various specialities in the UK West Midlands Deanery. Using validated questionnaires we compared the needs of different trainee groups. Results overall were internally consistent (Cronbach's alpha 0.929). RESULTS: Respondents' generally felt that they had poor training in EBM (Mean score 2.2, possible range 1 – 6) and that they needed more education (Mean score 5.3, possible range 1–6). Male trainees felt more confident at evaluating statistical tests than females (p = 0.002). Female trainees considered patient choice above the evidence more often than males (p = 0.038). Trainees from surgical speciality felt more confident at assessing research evidence (p = 0.009) whereas those from medical speciality felt more confident at evaluating statistical tests (p = 0.038) than other specialities. However, non-surgical specialities tended to believe that EBM had little impact on practice (p = 0.029). Respondents who had been qualified for 11 years or over felt overall more confident in their knowledge relating to EBM than those who had been qualified less than 10 years. In particular, they felt more confident at being able to assess study designs (p = < 0.001) and the general worth of research papers (p = < 0.001). Trainees with prior research experience were less likely to find original work confusing (p = 0.003) and felt more confident that they can assess research evidence (p = < 0.001) compared to those without previous research experience. Trainees without previous research experience felt that clinical judgement was more important than evidence (p = < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There is a perceived deficit in postgraduate doctors' EBM knowledge and critical appraisal skills. Learning needs vary according to gender, place of basic medical qualification, time since graduation, prior research experience and speciality. EBM training curricular development should take into account the findings of our needs assessment study. BioMed Central 2007-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC1885246/ /pubmed/17493274 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-7-11 Text en Copyright © 2007 Hadley et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Hadley, Julie A
Wall, David
Khan, Khalid S
Learning needs analysis to guide teaching evidence-based medicine: knowledge and beliefs amongst trainees from various specialities
title Learning needs analysis to guide teaching evidence-based medicine: knowledge and beliefs amongst trainees from various specialities
title_full Learning needs analysis to guide teaching evidence-based medicine: knowledge and beliefs amongst trainees from various specialities
title_fullStr Learning needs analysis to guide teaching evidence-based medicine: knowledge and beliefs amongst trainees from various specialities
title_full_unstemmed Learning needs analysis to guide teaching evidence-based medicine: knowledge and beliefs amongst trainees from various specialities
title_short Learning needs analysis to guide teaching evidence-based medicine: knowledge and beliefs amongst trainees from various specialities
title_sort learning needs analysis to guide teaching evidence-based medicine: knowledge and beliefs amongst trainees from various specialities
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1885246/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17493274
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6920-7-11
work_keys_str_mv AT hadleyjuliea learningneedsanalysistoguideteachingevidencebasedmedicineknowledgeandbeliefsamongsttraineesfromvariousspecialities
AT walldavid learningneedsanalysistoguideteachingevidencebasedmedicineknowledgeandbeliefsamongsttraineesfromvariousspecialities
AT khankhalids learningneedsanalysistoguideteachingevidencebasedmedicineknowledgeandbeliefsamongsttraineesfromvariousspecialities